APHC010058182026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3521] FRIDAY,THE SIXTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 3395/2026 Between: 1. SINGIRIGALLA OLAMMA, W/O. PEDDA OBULAPATHI, AGED ABOUT 71 YEARS, R/O. MUTHALOOR, RUDRAVARAM, KURNOOL ,518594 ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF HOME, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.522239 2. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, NANDYAL (KURNOOL) DISTRICT,518501 3. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, RUDRAVARAM POLICE STATION NANDYAL (KURNOOL) DISTRICT,518501 4. THE TAHSILDAR, RUDRAVARAM MANDAL,518594 5. BUCHHERLA PEDDA NARASIMHUDU, S/O. B. DIBBANNA, R/O. MUTHALOOR VILLAGE, RUDRAVARAM MANDAL, NANDYAL ,518594 ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. S V RUTHVIK 2 Dr. YLR, J W.P.No.3395 of 2026 Dated 06.02.2026 Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR HOME The Court made the following: 3 Dr. YLR, J W.P.No.3395 of 2026 Dated 06.02.2026 ORDER: The Writ Petition has been filed for the following relief: “…to issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ, Order Direction, declaring the inaction and failure of the 3rd respondent in not registering an FIR and inaction on written complaint dated 19.01.2026 submitted by the petitioner as illegal, arbitrary, and violative of Articles 14, 21, and 300-A of the Constitution of India and Consequently, direct the 3rd respondent to register an FIR forthwith on the petitioners complaint dated 19.01.2026 and provide police protection to the petitioners subject property…” 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader. 3. Mr.S.Veera Ruthvik, learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that Respondent No.3/the Station House Officer, Rudravaram Police Station, Nandyal District, has failed to act upon the complaint lodged by the petitioner on 19.01.2026. 4. Sri Ajay Babu, the learned Assistant Government Pleader, on written instructions, submits that a preliminary enquiry was conducted by Respondent No.3 and it was found that the complaint is civil in nature. 5. Considering the allegation that the petitioner’s house, constructed on patta land granted by Respondent No.4 authorities, was interfered by Respondent No.5 by engaging a bulldozer, it is evident that the petitioner has an efficacious civil remedy by way of instituting a suit for permanent injunction and seeking ad-interim relief against Respondent No.5. 4 Dr. YLR, J W.P.No.3395 of 2026 Dated 06.02.2026 6. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, and recording the submissions of the learned Government Pleader, the Writ Petition is disposed of, granting liberty to the petitioner to approach the competent civil court for redressal of grievance. 7. If the complaint of the petitioner discloses the commission of a cognizable offence, the petitioner has the alternative remedy of approaching Respondent No.2/the Superintendent of Police, by way of submitting a representation. If such representation is not considered, the petitioner has the right to file a private complaint under Section 190 read with 200 of ‘the Cr.P.C.,’ / Section 210 read with 223 of ‘the BNSS.,’ 8. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, Miscellaneous petitions, if any pending, shall stand closed. _________________________ DR. Y. LAKSHMANA RAO, J Date: 06.02.2026 PRA 5 Dr. YLR, J W.P.No.3395 of 2026 Dated 06.02.2026 84 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 3395 of 2026 Date: 06.02.2026 PRA